Reduction Test for particle decrease

Reduction Test of LightAir ionizing air cleaner

Place: Strandvägen 5B, Stockholm, officeTest & Report by: Anders HedströmDate: 2005 03 25

Table of contents

Summary 3Test conditions 4Method 4Conclusion 4General information 5Airborne particles 5Asthma symptoms & allergies 6Increasing interest for indoor air quality among the public 6Passive smoking 6The importance of house cleaning for the indoor air environm. 6Diagram D-Trak 7Diagram Ci500 (0.3 - 0.5 _m) & reference 8Diagram Ci500 (0.5 - 1 _m) & reference 9Diagram Ci500 (1 - 5 _m) & reference 10Diagram Ci500 (5 - 10 _m) & reference 11Diagram Ci500 (10 - 25 _m) & reference 12Diagram Ci500 (> 25 _m) & reference 13Diagram 0.02 - 1.0 _m & reference 14Additional remarks & comments 15Appendix: Airborne Particles in Sick and Healthy Buildings 16

SUMMARY

LightAir is a good ionizing air cleaner withcollector. It cleans well across all particle sizes,which is unusual for this type of air cleaning.LightAir cleans the air very well within thesmallest particle spectrum that can enter thelower parts of the lungs (which causes themost severe health problems). The results ofthis particle reduction test are consistentlygood considering the ionizing technique. Evenin comparison with Ulpa filters and othermechanical filters the cleaning is good. LightAirhandles the larger particles that stay in theupper part of the respiratory organs more thanwell, which is surprising. This is also a verygood quality aspect since larger particles oftensettle very quickly and therefore never reachthe collector. After the test we could clearlysee a thin layer of dust on the collector.

TEST CONDITIONS

Test leader Anders Hedström from NIAQ(Nordic Institute for Air Quality) carried out thetest of the LightAir ionizing air cleaner. ThisLightAir air cleaner was of table top/floor typewith a round acrylic transparent foot anddecorative LED lights.The test was conducted as a 20 minutesparticle reduction test in a 7,5 m2 office roomwith a window and normal ventilationoutlet/inlet. Normal activities were carried outin the surrounding office (computer, fax,telephone, dustbin, etc.). During the actual testthe door to the office room was closed toreceive reliable test results.The LightAir air cleaner was placed on asideboard at around a 100 cm height. All thetesting instruments were also placed in theroom. The test leader gathered information onthe air quality in the room before the LightAirair cleaner was put on and after. He alsoinformed and illustrated to the rest of the grouphow the test was going to be carried out.

METHOD

The first part of the test was a 10 minutesreference measure (see appendix) that showshow the air quality was before the air cleanerwas turned on. After the 10 minutes hadpassed the air cleaner was put on and theparticle reduction test was running for 20minutes.The test was conducted with particle counterOPC, CPC, ozone counter and a mass counterthat measures what types of particles thetested air contains. This real time test wascarried out with all the different measuringtechniques correlated. The reason for this wasto receive a clear picture of what particlesLightAir air cleaner was good or less good ateliminating.

CONCLUSION

LightAir has a very good ionizing technology.There are many advantages with thistechnology that mechanical air cleaningtechnologies do not have. The operationaladvantage of simplicity and good constructionis only one out of many aspects giving theionizing technology advantages beforemechanic filtration. The LightAir air cleaner isalso completely free from ozone production,which is very unusual, almost unique, for anyionizing air cleaning devices.There are possibly some disadvantages withionizing technology. We are not sure todaywhat effect charged particles could have onour mucous membranes. There are also somequestion marks about how these ionizingdevices handle bacteria that cannot becharged.However the most important aspect is that theoverall cleaning of the air was carried out in animpressively effective way in a normal officeenvironment.

GENERAL INFORMATION

People in the industrialized world spendapproximately 90% of their life indoors. Thebasic conditions for good indoor air quality isclean air, not to be mistaken for fresh air.Fresh air is what we call the air that entersthrough the ventilation system from theoutside. To get clean and healthy air you needhighly effective air cleaning is required.

The ultra fine particles composed of extremelysmall components create new, unknown airenvironments that are very difficult to analyze.The scientific know-how dealing with theseenvironments and particles is complicated, butwe know today that these particles causemany of our respiratory problems. Especiallythe smallest particles that enter all the way into the alveolus in the lungs where they causedamages and long-term illness like allergy,asthma, lung cancer and also heart andvascular deceases

Short-term health effects can occur in terms oftiredness, headache, respiratory infections,skin and eye problems.

The fixed ventilation systems in buildings arenecessary to supply oxygen and extracthumidity and other materials. Ventilation filtersystems can however not eliminate allparticles, especially not the smallest and mostharmful ones. An effective gas cleaning orchemical cleaning is not economicallyreasonable in a ventilation system.

AIRBORNE PARTICLES

From extensive research of air pollution in theoutdoor air and large epidemical studies weknow that there is a very strong correlationbetween particle levels and health. Thecorrelation is bigger for small particles (<2,5mm) than for larger. Already at very low levelsof dust outdoors (>15 mg/m3) can negativehealth effects can be proven.

If our airways and lungs are exposed to highlevels of ultra fine particles (0,01-0,1 mm)inflammatory lung deceases can occur. Theultra fine particles pass through our owncleaning/protection system of mucous thatnormally protects us and eliminates airpollution from the airways. When the ultra fineparticles enter the lung tissue in the mostsensitive parts of the lung, they triggersubstances to oxide and stimulate the

production of enzymes that destroys the cellpermanently. The ultra fine particles also enterthe bloodstream, which causes heart andvascular decease (see appendix 4, Smallparticles – Big Problem, Vicky Stone and KenDonaldson, Napier University, Edinburgh)

EPA (US Environmental Protection Agency)has put together a collection of extensivescientific reports that shows that particles aredangerous to our health (see Appendix 5,Selected Key studies on particulate matter andhealth, 1997-2001).

More than 800 scientific reports have beenpublished since 1996 in this area, partly due toincreased allowance from EPA for these kindsof studies. A summary of these reportsconfirms the correlation between particlepollution and deceases, sickness, hospitalvisits and early death. The most importantpoints in the reports are:

• Important long term studies are nowfully confirmed and validated

• New short term studies confirm causeof death

• New analysis show that a life can beshortened by months and years ratherthan days due to particle pollution

• Recent studies on test animals andpeople have shown heart relatedproblems due to particle pollution,which can explain the biologicalmechanisms leading to death.

ASTHMA SYMPTOMS ANDALLERGIES

Respiratory asthma is a common, often lifelong and sometimes life threatening decease.During the last decennium several reportshave shown the increase of asthma in manycountries, mostly among the younger part ofthe population (Allergy investigation, 1989,Burnley and more, 1990, Magnus and more,1991). It has been proven that even low levelsof organic substances that are normally inindoor air can cause inflammatory reactions inthe upper respiratory system (Koren and more,1992). And the correlation between asthmarelated symptoms and VOC-levels at homehas been proven ( Norbäck and more, 1995)as well as the correlation between asthma andmould (Burr and more, 1988). It has beensuggested that environmental aspects that cancause inflammation in the respiratory systemcould be one of the reasons for the increasedlevel of people suffering from asthma (AllergyInvestigation, 1989).

INCREASING INTEREST FORINDOOR AIR QUALITY AMONG THEPUBLIC

The proportion of the Swedish population whobelieve that the indoor environment isimportant for the health is 60-70% and itgradually increases according to the PeoplesHealth Institute (1999). The same report showsthat dry air, dust/dirt and noise are among theproblems that are mostly mentioned and thatpeople who are seldom outdoors are moresensitive to allergies and asthma.

PASSIVE SMOKING

One of the major known indoor air pollution istobacco smoke. An increased level ofrespiratory infections leading to pneumonia orbronchitis has been confirmed for people whoare affected by passive smoking (Sundell J,Kjellman M, 1995). And passive smoking is avery common background cause for childrendeveloping asthma.

THE IMPORTANCE OF HOUSECLEANING FOR INDOOR AIRENVIRONMENT

I is well known since many years that housecleaning is of great importance to the indoorenvironment. Dust and particles indoorsemanate from materials in the building, like forexample from wearing down floors andcarpets, isolation material etc. (Lundqvist,1986). But most of the indoor dust is createdby people and their activities. Dust indoors innon-industrial premises generally consists offibers from clothes, allergens from animal fur,food remainders and paper (Lundqvist, 1986).Some dust particles, like animal fur, we carrywith us from other environments (Munir andmore, 1993). Particles, especially the ultra fineones are from cooking, smoking, vacuumcleaning etc. These particles are often carriersof allergens and trace elements. Dust can alsobe a carrier of different chemical pollutantsfrom industrial activities and building/interiormaterials. Dust contains microorganisms likevirus, bacteria and mould, which can grow inparts of buildings where temperature andhumidity are favorable and be spread bypeople. This risk will increase if cleaning is notdone properly.

Test Results & References of LightAir ionizing air cleaner

Here we can observe the mass of particles in the air, especially the larger ones. We can see that theparticle content of 50 µg/m3 in 20 minutes has been reduced to a level of 25 µg/m3 meaning a massreduction of 50% which is a very good result. The reason is the efficient collaboration in between theionizer and the collector and how the voltage affects the air. The efficiency of an ionizer is mostly dueto the sharpness of the corona and also the created electrical charge. 20 µg/m3 is considered a lowvalue

Reference:

The upper graph shows the reference result that was taken before the reduction test. The graph belowshows the average result after 19 minutes of cleaning. As one can see there is a clear improvementwithin this particle spectrum after cleaning.

Here we observe the particles which are the most difficult to catch in a conventional mechanical filter.The gray line is the average of normal air. This particle spectrum stays rather constant. The cleaning isabout 6,85%, which seems not to be very good. It is however important to understand that thistechnology makes smaller particles cluster and agglomerate into larger size particles that arecontinuously refilling this particular spectrum. Enormous volumes of nano particles cluster andaggregate into larger particles so what we see in the graph is the result of the reduction of particles ofthis size and the simultaneous creation of particles of the same size meaning a drastic reduction ofsmaller size particles. Therefore to still reach a reduction of 6,85% is in fact very good. Within thisparticle spectrum there are many controlled tests since mechanical filter have difficulties to trapparticles of this size. However these particles are considered not very dangerous to our health as ourdefense mechanism can handle them effectively.

Reference:

This particle size show that the ionizing air cleaner does not reduce particles, but creates new largerparticles of the small particles tested. The reason for this result is that the nano particles tend toagglomerate to larger particles. The bigger particles are however less harmful to humans. The resultafter cleaning was 40.000.000 particles/m3.

Even in this particle spectrum there are particles that can be inhaled and cause problems but theygenerally get caught in the upper respiratory system and do not reach all the way out into the alveolusin the most sensitive parts of the lungs. The gray line shows the average of normal air in Stockholm.We can see a reduction from 6.000.000 to 3.500.000 particles per m3 meaning 47% reduction in 19minutes. This must be considered very good as the technology creates particles also of this size fromparticles in the nano spectrum.

Reference:

Compare the reference graph, the upper, with the reduction graph, the lower. We can see a clearreduction, which is good. This reference is very stable.

Within this particle spectrum we observe a reduction of 75%, which is good. As these particles cansediment faster than smaller particles they can be more difficult to trap for an air cleaner. The gray lineshows an average of normal air in Stockholm. The ionizer continues to show a good result. Within thisspectrum you will find bacteria and certain pollen.

Reference:

Again, we can observe a stable a apparent level where the particles are of the same number under alonger period of time.

These particles are the first to be seen by the human eye. They sediment fast. We can observe thatthe ionizer does a good job reducing the number of particles to a level far below the average of goodquality air. The reduction of 75% is very good.

Reference:

The lower graph shows result after cleaning. Again we can see that the smaller particles to someextent agglomerate. There should also be some sedimentation.

The larger particles are being reduced according to this graph proving the effect of the ionizer. Verygood.

Reference:

The straight lower graph shows after cleaning. Particles in this size are emitted mostly from paper andsimilar.

In this spectrum we see the particles meaning dust. The beginning of this graph is especiallyinteresting as it shows the clustering of smaller into larger particles actually temporarily increasing thenumber of large particles in this spectrum. Then the curve drops rapidly down to almost 100% cleaningin this particle spectrum of dust. This is a remarkable and excellent result by a passive air cleaner. Wecan also observe that the particle level is kept low after the initial reduction.

Reference:

Here we observe the absolutely smallest particles in the air. These nano particles derive from carexhaust, combustion and photochemical catalytical production.The gray line is the average of normal air in Stockholm. At the beginning of the graph there were about9.000 particles per cm3 air, which is 9.000.000.000 per m3. Note that this is in normal officeenvironment in Stockholm. After 20 minutes the level has been reduced to 5.000 particles per cm3,which is a reduction of 47%. The average for an office without air cleaning in Stockholm is about 7.300particles per cm3. To be able to reach a level of 5.000 particles per cm3 when at the same time theoutdoor air was measured to contain 20.000 particles per cm3 is very good In such a short period oftime.

Reference:

The upper reference graph show high values. The lower graph show result after cleaning. Note the bigdifference. It is very difficult to clean within this particle spectrum since the particles are so small andthe room can already be considered clean. This is a difficult test for the ionizing air cleaner, which itperform very well (Please see reduction test above).

ADDITIONAL REMARKS & COMMENTS

The decay test was carried out according tothe norms of ISO 14644 clean room standardof particle testing and according to the IESTstandards for testing of nano particles. The testwas carried out in a normal office environmentin Stockholm. The evaluation of the LightAir aircleaner has shown that it cleans the air welland does not create any byproducts likeozone. The level of ozone was measuredthroughout the test whereby no measurablelevel could be detected. NIAQ test techniquesand methods are based on the SwedishStandard SS-EN ISO 14644-1, SS-EN ISO1644-2, and IEST-G-CC1002.

Airborne Particles in Sick and Healthy BuildingsBy Bengt Christensson, National Institute for Working Environment

From extensive testing and measuring of pollution in the outdoor air and extensive epidemiologicalstudies we now know that there is a very strong correlation between particle level and health. Thecorrelation is stronger for smaller particles (< 2,5 µm) than for larger particles. Already at very lowoutdoor dust levels (>15 µg/m3) negative health effects have been proven.

Particles in the air are a pollution that always exists indoors, but which has not been sufficientlystudied. The air quality research indoors has often been focused on hydro carbonic gases,microorganism, formaldehyde, ammoniac, carbon dioxide and different physical parameters.

Characteristic for airborne particles is that they exist in different sizes from hundredths part to tenthspart of a micrometer and that their measured levels of particles (both as numbers and mass pervolume) are highly dependent on which particle size that is measured and that the occurrence variesenormously in time and space. Skin irritation, eye irritation and irritation in the upper respiratorysystem can be connected to the presence of particles.

During the last 10 years the National Institute for Working Environment has conducted particle tests insick buildings and reference buildings. The purpose of the tests has been to establish the relationbetween health problems and particle levels as well as to establish which particle parameters areimportant. The purpose is also to determine how particles indoor occur and develop, that is how themechanism of supply, production and transportation of particles in the building look like. At themoment a 3-year project is conducted in this area financed by BFR (Swedish Council for BuildingResearch). When the result from this project is reported late this fall some of these questions thatcould be answered.

The report is not yet finished. It is possible that the sick buildings can be divided in at least twocategories, polluted buildings and water damaged buildings. In the polluted buildings there are oftenan increased level of dust, especially of particles larger than 1 µm. The reason could be insufficientventilation, lack of cleaning, defect or wrong building materials, too many people in the premises, badjudged use of premises and flaky floors. Most often it is a combination of the mentioned reasons.

Small particles (<1 µm) are mainly produced through condensation. Indoor sources could be smoking,lighting fires, candles, cooking, etc. If there are no indoor activities, the particle level is determined byoutdoor sources like car exhaust, house warming, industries, etc. The capacity of the supply air filtersand the volume of supply air determines how much small particles we have indoors from the outdoorair.